Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Evaluation of fit of cement-retained implant-supported 3-unit structures fabricated with direct metal laser sintering and vacuum casting techniques

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study evaluated the vertical discrepancy of implant-fixed 3-unit structures. Frameworks were constructed with laser-sintered Co–Cr, and vacuum-cast Co–Cr, Ni–Cr–Ti, and Pd–Au. Samples of each alloy group were randomly luted in standard fashion using resin-modified glass-ionomer, self-adhesive, and acrylic/urethane-based cements (n = 12 each). Discrepancies were SEM analyzed. Three-way ANOVA and Student–Newman–Keuls tests were run (P < 0.05). Laser-sintered structures achieved the best fit per cement tested. Within each alloy group, resin-modified glass-ionomer and acrylic/urethane-based cements produced comparably lower discrepancies than the self-adhesive agent. The abutment position did not yield significant differences. All misfit values could be considered clinically acceptable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Oyagüe RC, Turrión AS, Toledano M, Monticelli F, Osorio R. In vitro vertical misfit evaluation of cast frameworks for cement-retained implant-supported partial prostheses. J Dent. 2009;37:52–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yoshida K, Atsuta M. Effects of adhesive primers for noble metals on shear bond strengths of resin cements. J Dent. 1997;25:53–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Akova T, Ucar Y, Tukay A, Balkaya MC, Brantley WA. Comparison of the bond strength of laser-sintered and cast base metal dental alloys to porcelain. Dent Mater. 2008;24:1400–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Roach M. Base metal alloys used for dental restorations and implants. Dent Clin North Am. 2007;51:603–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morris HF. Properties of cobalt-chromium metal ceramic alloys after heat treatment. J Prosthet Dent. 1990;63:426–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ucar Y, Akova T, Akyil MS, Brantley WA. Internal fit evaluation of crowns prepared using a new dental crown fabrication technique: laser-sintered Co–Cr crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;102:253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Anusavice KJ. Phillips’ science of dental materials. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Traini T, Mangano C, Sammons RL, Mangano F, Macchi A, Piatelli A. Direct laser metal sintering as a new approach to fabrication of an isoelastic functionally graded material for manufacture of porous titanium dental implants. Dent Mater. 2008;24:1525–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Quante K, Ludwig K, Kern M. Marginal and internal fit of metal-ceramic crowns fabricated with a new laser melting technology. Dent Mater. 2008;24:1311–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Örtorp A, Jönsson D, Mouhsen A, Vult von Steyern P. The fit of cobalt-chromium three-unit fixed dental prostheses fabricated with four different techniques: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater. 2011;27:356–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant. 2003;18:719–28.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bottino MA, Valandro LF, Buso L, Ozcan M. The influence of cervical finish line, internal relief, and cement type on the cervical adaptation of metal crowns. Quintessence Int. 2007;38:425–32.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Xie D, Brantley WA, Culbertson BM, Wang G. Mechanical properties and microstructures of glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 2000;16:129–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gonzalo E, Suárez MJ, Serrano B, Lozano JF. A comparison of the marginal vertical discrepancies of zirconium and metal ceramic posterior fixed dental prostheses before and after cementation. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;102:378–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Brånemark implants in edentulous jaws: a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant. 1991;6:270–6.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This investigation was supported by research projects: UCM 41/2009 and UCM 164/2010. The authors would like to thank the Prótesis SA Dental Laboratory (Madrid) for the technical advice received and for manufacturing the structures. We are also grateful to the Centre of Data Processing, Computing Service for Research Support, Complutense University of Madrid (U.C.M.) for the assistance with the statistical analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raquel Castillo Oyagüe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Oyagüe, R.C., Sánchez-Turrión, A., López-Lozano, J.F. et al. Evaluation of fit of cement-retained implant-supported 3-unit structures fabricated with direct metal laser sintering and vacuum casting techniques. Odontology 100, 249–253 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-011-0050-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-011-0050-1

Keywords

Navigation